1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

Around 01:10 on June 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 201:10, the Defendant saw the victim to own cab hand in front of 1974 while boarding the bus platform of a bus terminal in the 2nd camp Yacheon-si, U.S. Yacheon-si, which was driven by the victim D (the age of 52) on the 1974 taxi platform; (b) was plucked by the victim’s own cab hand in front of the 1974 string; and (c) caused the victim’s desire to take a bath from the said victim on two occasions, the Defendant sawd the victim on about three weeks of the left eye of the fabbsp.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant and the defense counsel asserts that the act recorded in the facts charged in the instant case constitutes self-defense and thus, illegality is excluded. In a case where it is reasonable to deem that the perpetrator’s act was committed with an intent to attack one another, rather than with a view to defending the victim’s unfair attack, and that the act was committed against one another and was committed against the attack, the act has the nature of the act of attack at the same time as the act of defense, and thus, it cannot

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Do228 delivered on March 28, 200). According to the defendant's partial statement and D's legal statement in this case, according to the defendant's partial statement and D's legal statement, the defendant spits food that the defendant saw to the defendant by plucking hand of the victim, and the defendant spited against this, and the victim spits food that he saw to the defendant again, followed the defendant's face, and the defendant spits food that he saw on his own, and twice times the victim's face. Thus, according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant's act has the character of an attack rather than a defense act.